Indian Missiles and Munitions Discussion

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Dec 2010 01:59

Gagan wrote:That joint line could be something as simple as the length of the sheet metal used for covering the body - the skin of the missile wrapped around the skeleton.
Difficult to say if that is an actual joint there.
But its appearence in a missile without a vented stage is suspicious indeed.

Now if we look at the nose cone, the entire cone is I think just the warhead section, there is no space for a HAM, as opposed to the A-II where the heat sheild has a warhead + a HAM motor in it.
So this one sounds like a 2 stage missile unlike the 2+ stage in the usual A-II.
So I wonder if this is a 3 stage missile, given that it has a long composite stage and no vented stage.

Gagan, Its two segment motor for the first stage. The line is the case to case joint in the factory.

Please read the following to see industry practice elsewhere

SRM Case to Case joints design

Its two stage design with F/S (white portion) and Second Stage (red/maroon/rust portion). The payload has many patch antennas which show its capabilities and is said to be 1 tonne ie 2000kg.

And the white section with two 'eyes' under the rust colored section is the separation segment thats linked earlier in this thread. The flare in the s/s has two purposes.
First is to provide transition to the dia change between F/S and S/s and to provide static stability to the S/S during flight. Serves as virtual fins to keep the center of pressure aft of the varying CG.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Dec 2010 04:16

Maybe the joint leaked leading to the anomaly?

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 14 Dec 2010 05:15

ramana wrote:Kanson is that a bump on which "INDIA" is painted. I see a raised surface on which "I" is painted.

If so, that is the conduit for controlling the F/S TVC.

We can see a similar raised surface on the side of the red portion too.

No..i'm not talking about that sleeve.

The middle joint is intriguing. Is it a joint for the two sections that form the F/S? What I mean is the F/S casing is made of two segments which are joined together and the propellent grain is cast continuous?

As i said earlier, it doesn't appear like a segment joint.

Just for common understanding of semantics....a misile has one or many stages and a stage is made out of one or many segments. For simplicity, these segments are casted with propellant seperately and attached later (as one can see in ISRO S200 motor).

Agni missiles so far fielded don't have such "rings". Neither can be seen in S200 motor.

Segment joint when seen, doesn't look like two separate section joined wtih a third section as seen here with a "ring".

NASA SRB motor joint is between two sections/segments is a "clevis and clevis" joint or more commonly called as "tang and clevis" joint and this same kind is used in S200 motor. This joint doesn't involve a third section(ring) as we seen in A2P.

srai · Post by **srai** » 14 Dec 2010 06:30

rakall wrote:
Ajatshatru wrote:A basic query:

If already 1000 Akash missiles therefore approx. 20 existing squadrons (if 48 missiles per squadron). Add 300 more missiles i.e. 6 more more squadrons to the above plus an already placed earlier order of 2 squadrons (6 + 2 = 8 ) thus a grand total of 28 squadrons.... In case of a simultaneous war with China and Pakistan, is there some minimum numbers of Akash squadrons that may be required for such an eventuality?
NOTE: There might have been a "huge" typo on the number of Akash missiles already in IAF service.. IAF probably has 100missiles = 2squadrons.. IAF had previously ordered 2squadrons in the first tranche.. there have been reports that they intended to place orders for 6more squadrons -- looks like the order is still circling in the various levels of approvals..

So far 2squadrons = 100missiles already ordered.. 6more squadrons = 300missiles very much will be cleared shortly.. Hopefully a few more sqadrons as they get more confidence in the system..

The reporter is all mixed up

If you want to look at the numbers, here is my calculations done a couple of months back .

Basically, it breaks down as follows:

Each Akash squadron has around 125 missiles in stock as the IAF has ordered 8 squadrons with a total of 1,000 missiles. First two squadrons were ordered with 250 missiles and the follow-on (pending) order for six squadrons with 750 missiles.
Each Akash squadron has 2 Combat Flights (or 2 batteries with 4 AAFL launchers each). This would mean each flight to have 62 missiles in stock (if allocated equally). I am assuming the 48 number given in the news report to be an active minimum stock with the rest 14-15 being deep reserves and training rounds. So looks like 12 missiles on 4 x AAFLs and at least 3 reloads (36 missiles) available per flight/battery.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 14 Dec 2010 06:37

http://livefist.blogspot.com/

I sent the picture above to India Today senior editor Sandeep Unnithan, who broke the story recently about India's secret K-series of missiles, to see what he thought. Here's what he had to say: "There is a myth created by missile experts on internet forums about SLBM variants of the Agni III and V. They have gone ahead and created several impressions of what it will look like complete with MIRVs etc.

Prasun "my name is originality" Sengupta comments:

The entities that have been spreading the disinformation (both visually and in terms of data) about the Agni-derived SLBMs are in fact some US-based Bharat Rakshak wannabes and forum. administrators.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Dec 2010 07:07

The A2P revealed specs are very similar to the estimates of AIIAT.

Eventually all will be well.

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 14 Dec 2010 16:48

Prasun S-the PhotoStat venting out years of disdain.

Prasun K. Sengupta said...
To [email protected]: And who has prounced me guilty? You? And what/certainly stopped Arun from sueing me? Certainly wasn't me! I had welcomed it and filed a counter-suit following which he and the late B Harry both chickened out. That should prove who was guilty of what.

To Anon!10.27AM: And exactly how many times did BR reproduce my articles en verbatim since 2004 in various forums? How come you don't accuse the forum moderators of 'chori'?

To [email protected]: You're right. That's why I didn't mention anyone by name. Anyway, the truth always comes out somehow, as borne out by other bloggers mentioning Arun Vishwakarma/Sharma by name.

To [email protected]: There's no evidence whatsoever to even suggest Sandeep Unnithan is implying the origin of the K-series SLBMs being of foreign origin. All that he has done is point out in layman's terms the fundamental design challenges faced when developing SLBMs, and exactly how distinct these challenges are when compared to the challenges faced when developing land-based IRBMs/MRBMs.

To Shiv Aroor: I strongly concur.

2:05 PM
Prasun K. Sengupta said...
To [email protected]: Reliable info coming from BR? Are you kidding? Is that why they equate the T-50 PAK-FA as the FGFA, despite successive IAF Chiefs of Air Staff repeatedly explaining in various on-the-record published interviews since March 2005 exactly how different the FGFA will be from the PAK-5A? Those guys at BR can't even distinguish between n-reactor physics and n-reactor engineering, and hence till this day claim that the BARC (and not NPCIL) has been 'designing' n-reactors in India!!! Have any of them even stepped inside any DAE corporate office to pick up any literature that clearly spells out exactly what the core competencies of BARC and NPCIL are? Have any of the forum moderators even visited any aerospace expos and spoken to the likes of Alexey Fedorov who in February 2009 gave several interviews to various SHOW DAILIES in which the differences between the FGFA and T-50 PAK-FA were spelt out? I find journalists/reporters a far better breed as they at least have the guts to go and ask some questions on record from the relevant authorities.

2:17 PM

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 14 Dec 2010 17:14

Ha, ha, ha. Got a good laugh out of chorgupta's statements. DDM number 1 indeed - need a movie by that name with Govinda in the lead wearing Dada Kondke's chaddi with nada hanging out

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Dec 2010 17:28

Poor PS.He hasn't yet realised that "disinformation" is a key to winning both the cyber war/propaganda war and the real war on the battlefield.We know that BR is watched like a hawk by our enemies.If everyone on BR posted each time hard,authentic info about the Indian
armed forces ,all that our enemies would need to garner info would be to just log on each day and retire their covert intel ops! It's fun keeping them guessing! Nevertheless,that does not mean that BRitons are either ill-informed or incapable of obtaining accurate info from open and authentic sources.A whole host of BRitons regularly attend Aero-India and other Def-Expo events.As the famous saying goes,with respect to sensitive info,
"into a closed mouth,entereth no fly".

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 14 Dec 2010 18:02

Arun should go on livefist and tear the bugger a new one, as only he can.

sarabpal.s · Post by **sarabpal.s** » 14 Dec 2010 18:14

shiv wrote:http://livefist.blogspot.com/

Prasun "my name is originality" Sengupta comments:
The entities that have been spreading the disinformation (both visually and in terms of data) about the Agni-derived SLBMs are in fact some US-based Bharat Rakshak wannabes and forum. administrators.

And Prasun.k is replying to ur truly sarabpal.s AKA mirza.
I think i just hit him where it hurt most or i just step on on his tail

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 14 Dec 2010 18:18

Prasun Sengupta = Prasun ChorGupta. He is the AQ Khan of defence journalism.

saurav.jha · Post by **saurav.jha** » 14 Dec 2010 19:18

Looks like every one is giving PAR-soon befitting reply..Lets see if it puts some sense into him..

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 14 Dec 2010 19:52

Trial for air safety in missile test ---- Jitters at ill-equipped city airport as Agni II launch triggers traffic jam
http://telegraphindia.com/1101214/jsp/c ... 295887.jsp

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 14 Dec 2010 20:53

Mr Chorgupta is smarting. Perhaps his methods have been exposed thru BRites efforts. We finally managed to hit where it hurts.

ashokpachori · Post by **ashokpachori** » 14 Dec 2010 21:18

Agni-II Prime also had a better stage separation system, efficient propulsion, high-energy propellants, more efficient batteries to provide better power supply and sophisticated retro rockets. It had a good configuration which meant the user (the Army) could move it around easily.

With above presence (retro rockets) in A2P, it means that, its gonna be a "hot separation" whereby the separation impulse is generated by the same (retro rocket).

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 14 Dec 2010 21:26

I am certain that one link to Livefist from BRF gives Shiv Aroor a few hundred hits a day. Prasun Sengupta is posting prominently on there to try and wean off viewers to his blog or site or whatever. Typical trick used by thousands. We had a spammer on BR this morning trying to get eyeballs for a p()rn site.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 14 Dec 2010 21:36

ashok, From the TSS article in Hindu retro rockets could be to provide positive separation of the stages to ensure there is no bumping after the separation event.

ashokpachori · Post by **ashokpachori** » 14 Dec 2010 22:21

ramana wrote:ashok, From the TSS article in Hindu retro rockets could be to provide positive separation of the stages to ensure there is no bumping after the separation event.

So why its not a everyday affair, i mean earlier Agni went without one.......

There is hot separation and cold separation, depending upon the parameters DRDO maintains. The paramount worry for DRDO, as always is, that of a tipoff, to not disturb the trajectory of continuing stage. IMO smooth decoupling of stages is normal with both methods.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 14 Dec 2010 22:59

shiv wrote:I am certain that one link to Livefist from BRF gives Shiv Aroor a few hundred hits a day. Prasun Sengupta is posting prominently on there to try and wean off viewers to his blog or site or whatever. Typical trick used by thousands. We had a spammer on BR this morning trying to get eyeballs for a p()rn site.

Is it not he stopped writing in his blogs? If he make comments don't know what makes him not to do that in his own blog and writing how K series is different from Agni.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 14 Dec 2010 23:34

Gagan wrote:That joint line could be something as simple as the length of the sheet metal used for covering the body - the skin of the missile wrapped around the skeleton.
Difficult to say if that is an actual joint there.
But its appearence in a missile without a vented stage is suspicious indeed.

If you want to see the difference, here is the better picture to see the joints in Agni-3.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/S ... 773935.JPG

This is the magnified Agni-3 section with markings

to be compared against Agni-2P ring

to see the difference and the ring could possibly represents

.

dinesha · Post by **dinesha** » 15 Dec 2010 17:19

RF-India BrahMos Aerospace JV sign new contracts till 2017
http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.htm ... &PageNum=0

MOSCOW, December 15 (Itar-Tass) - The Russian-Indian joint venture BrahMos Aerospace Ltd. have signed new contracts on supplies of Brahmos missiles till 2017.

Under the contracts, missiles will be supplied to Indian Air Force, the Navy and the Indian Army, chief designer of the NPO Machine Building Military Industrial Corporation Alexander Leonov told Itar-Tass.

He declined to specify the price of the contracts. But the official stressed that they “envisage supplying a good deal of the Brahmos supersonic cruise missiles”.

“If India intends to acquire new Russian non-atomic submarines, the Rubin Central Design Bureau for Marine Engineering will prepare variants to be equipped with the Brahmos missiles,” Leonov said.

According to earlier reports, India intends to acquire six non-atomic submarines. The Indian Navy will put out a tender for purchasing submarines with a standard power plant. Rosoboronexport says it offers the Amur-1650 submarine to participate in the Navy’s tender for six non-nuclear submarines.

Established in 1998, BrahMos Aerospace, a joint Indian-Russian venture, produces and markets BrahMos supersonic missiles, whose sea-based and land-based versions have been successfully tested and put into service with the Indian army and navy.

The BrahMos missile has a range of 290 km (180 miles) and can carry a conventional warhead of up to 300 kg (660 pounds). It can hit ground targets flying at an altitude as low as 10 meters (30 feet) and has a top speed of Mach 2.8, which is about three times faster than the U.S.-made subsonic Tomahawk cruise missile.

The head of BrahMos Aerospace earlier said that the recent acquisition of an assembly plant in the state of Kerala from Kerala Hightech Industries Ltd, in addition to the main plant in Hyderabad, would allow the company to increase production to 50 BrahMos missiles a year and fulfill orders from the army on schedule.

Analysts estimate that India could purchase up to 1,000 BrahMos missiles for its armed forces in the next decade, and export 2,000 to other countries during the same period.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 15 Dec 2010 17:32

dinesha wrote:RF-India BrahMos Aerospace JV sign new contracts till 2017
http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.htm ... &PageNum=0
SNIP......
The head of BrahMos Aerospace earlier said that the recent acquisition of an assembly plant in the state of Kerala from Kerala Hightech Industries Ltd, in addition to the main plant in Hyderabad, would allow the company to increase production to 50 BrahMos missiles a year and fulfill orders from the army on schedule.
Snip.....

What will be the numbers per year once the Pilani facillity comes on stream by 2012?

100 ?

ashokpachori · Post by **ashokpachori** » 15 Dec 2010 17:42

50 BrahMos missiles a year

1,000 BrahMos missiles for its armed forces in the next decade, and export 2,000 to other countries

That is 3000 Brahmos = 60 years....
Is this how our country should work?

Even a tiny toon Taiwan is mass producing cruise missiles.

nrshah · Post by **nrshah** » 15 Dec 2010 17:55

^^^Do you believe both 3000 and 50/100 annum figures as reality?

Anabhaya · Post by **Anabhaya** » 15 Dec 2010 18:17

It would be an achievement if at all we can manage to produce and absorb 50 pieces a year.

ashokpachori · Post by **ashokpachori** » 15 Dec 2010 18:25

nrshah wrote:^^^Do you believe both 3000 and 50/100 annum figures as reality?

I am relying on the media and refuse to speculate.
If you know the reality please let me know.

P Chitkara · Post by **P Chitkara** » 15 Dec 2010 18:45

Do we have any reliable, ok reasonably reliable link on numbers for Brahmos projected by the forces?

Nirbhay will also be online in a few years so I guess it cannot be 2000 - should be less than that.

I was going through the comments of PS - man. he is mighty p!!sed off by BR

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 15 Dec 2010 19:34

Anabhaya wrote:It would be an achievement if at all we can manage to produce and absorb 50 pieces a year.

We need 10,000 of these ... 50 per year is pathetic ... on the other hand, maybe we mass-produce the K-series missiles, longer range, higher speed (Mach 8?), and no dependence on Russia. Perhaps a somewhat smaller edition will serve as a good alternative to Brahmos.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 15 Dec 2010 19:50

someone just emailed me some comments of PS (no intention of going there)

The calibre of that man can be seen from his comments on Harry. wow - he thinks providence stepped in and left him standing. wow.
Aroor must be squirming on allowing this.

Anabhaya · Post by **Anabhaya** » 15 Dec 2010 20:00

Pranav wrote:We need 10,000 of these ... 50 per year is pathetic ... on the other hand, maybe we mass-produce the K-series missiles, longer range, higher speed (Mach 8?), and no dependence on Russia. Perhaps a somewhat smaller edition will serve as a good alternative to Brahmos.

Why stop at 10,000? Why not 20,000?

It's one thing to quote arbitary numbers and completely another to pay for the missiles, launchers, crew, their escort, transport, training, maintenance and testing. If at all we can achieve 50 pieces a year - THAT would be ideal - thats a bill we would be able to pay for.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 15 Dec 2010 20:20

Anabhaya wrote:
Pranav wrote:We need 10,000 of these ... 50 per year is pathetic ... on the other hand, maybe we mass-produce the K-series missiles, longer range, higher speed (Mach 8?), and no dependence on Russia. Perhaps a somewhat smaller edition will serve as a good alternative to Brahmos.
Why stop at 10,000? Why not 20,000?

It's one thing to quote arbitary numbers and completely another to pay for the missiles, launchers, crew, their escort, transport, training, maintenance and testing. If at all we can achieve 50 pieces a year - THAT would be ideal - thats a bill we would be able to pay for.

OK, 10,000 is arbitrary ... but we need enough PGMs (including guided artillery shells) to guarantee overwhelming superiority in a conventional war scenario.

And the costs have to brought down. When you are mass-producing the missiles, they should not cost more than a typical automobile, imho.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 15 Dec 2010 23:55

Surya wrote:someone just emailed me some comments of PS (no intention of going there)

The calibre of that man can be seen from his comments on Harry. wow - he thinks providence stepped in and left him standing. wow.
Aroor must be squirming on allowing this.

It speaks very poorly of Aroor that he is allowing these sort of distasteful remarks to stand. I have read several of Harry's articles on ACIG & Sengupta is gloating at his demise. Shameful.

srai · Post by **srai** » 16 Dec 2010 00:22

ashokpachori wrote:
50 BrahMos missiles a year

1,000 BrahMos missiles for its armed forces in the next decade, and export 2,000 to other countries
That is 3000 Brahmos = 60 years....
Is this how our country should work?

Even a tiny toon Taiwan is mass producing cruise missiles.

FYI, production capacity is not static. It will ramp up over the next few years and then decrease after reaching a maximum capacity. Think of it like a "bell curve" production numbers to achieve 1,000-3,000 missiles in 10 years.

You should read up on the concept of Operations Management .

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 16 Dec 2010 15:53

Surya wrote:someone just emailed me some comments of PS (no intention of going there)

The calibre of that man can be seen from his comments on Harry. wow - he thinks providence stepped in and left him standing. wow.
Aroor must be squirming on allowing this.

I recall sometime back, Aroor claimed that he sent these pics(I think it is the speculated Agni-5 pics) to concerned agency(i think it is drdo) and got clarified that it is close to agency's programme. If he has done that before, why not now he repeat the same thing, if interested to have a clarification. Why unnecessarily PS is inserting himself into all this. He has a blog and if he want he can comment there. I dont think Aroor is squirming. To borrow a famous phrase, i guess he is "stringing along".

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 16 Dec 2010 15:58

srai, i'm not following it up closely, but somewhere Brahmos Corp. was claiming to increase the capacity several fold. I guess 50 per year is the earlier expectation. Not sure how correct these are.

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 16 Dec 2010 16:01

Or it if what to a borrow a sentence, why these three are scratching each others back.

ashokpachori · Post by **ashokpachori** » 16 Dec 2010 16:57

srai wrote:

FYI, production capacity is not static. It will ramp up over the next few years and then decrease after reaching a maximum capacity. Think of it like a "bell curve" production numbers to achieve 1,000-3,000 missiles in 10 years.

Alas!
If only the graphs and the charts can translate India´s tardy production of defense material into mass production.

Anyway, here is some:

"We plan to increase the production of the missile system by 300 per cent in the next two years," A. Sivathanu Pillai, chief executive officer and managing director of BrahMos Aerospace

Above is dated (year) 2007...............http://www.hindu.com/2007/03/18/stor...1805011000.htm

And now after 3 years we get the following, that also after adding one more plant:

The head of BrahMos Aerospace earlier said that the recent acquisition of an assembly plant in the state of Kerala from Kerala Hightech Industries Ltd, in addition to the main plant in Hyderabad, would allow the company to increase production to 50 BrahMos missiles a year

Dont we know how India´s bureaucracy/babudom works ?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 16 Dec 2010 17:08

Guys,

This discussion has completely ignored the upcoming production facility near Pilani expected to come online by 2012. Once that happens the numbers may well go above 150 / year.

JMT

ashokpachori · Post by **ashokpachori** » 16 Dec 2010 17:22

Pratyush wrote:Guys,

This discussion has completely ignored the upcoming production facility near Pilani expected to come online by 2012. Once that happens the numbers may well go above 150 / year.

JMT

If two dedicated plants manufacture 50 Brahmos, how will the addition of a third plant would be responsible to swell the numbers 3 times over?
The news does not inflate the numbers to 150, on the contrary its silent on numbers:

http://www.brahmos.com/newscenter.php?newsid=114